GTX 760 2gb vs Radeon HD 7950 3gb
Tags:
- Nvidia
-
AMD
- Build
-
Graphics
- Gtx
-
Graphics Cards
- HD
-
Radeon
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
jsmessick
April 30, 2014 7:15:37 PM
Trying up update my graphics card on my current build. Which of these is a better option? Can get both around a similar price point. I am a college student, I enjoy some video editting/photoshop but not a ton and gaming pretty often.
my current set up:
AMD Phenom II x4
GTX 460
4 gb of ram
my current set up:
AMD Phenom II x4
GTX 460
4 gb of ram
More about : gtx 760 2gb radeon 7950 3gb
-
Reply to jsmessick
Best solution
Related resources
- Sapphire Radeon HD7950 3GB OC Edition V3 vs EVGA GeForce GTX 760 Superclocked 2GB - Forum
- Radeon HD7950 3GB with boost vs Sparkle GTX760 2GB - Forum
- GTX 760 2gb SC or Radeon HD 7950 3gb OC - Forum
- GTX 760 2gb or Radeon HD 7950 3gb? - Forum
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 2GB GDDR5 256-bit or AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 384-bit? - Forum
The 760 pulls ~8% higher performance. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_7...
-
Reply to Gam3r01
m
0
l
Gam3r01 said:
The 760 pulls ~8% higher performance. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_7...lol, comparing an 800mhz 7950 to a 980mhz 760 is not fair, a 22.5% higher clock rate vs a measly 8% performance increase. everybody knows they will both reach an average overclock somewhere in the 1150mhz range and the 7950 will beat it clock for clock easily.
fully expect a 7950 to be 5-10% faster than a 760.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
not sure where you guys have been in the last few years. the 7950 and 670 are comparable with the 670 having a slight overall performance edge while the 7950 has a vram advantage. also depending on the games being played. the 670 has 1344 cores while the 760 has 1152 cores and is noticably slower than a 670.
what the op is basically asking is gtx760 vs r9-280. the short answer is the 280/7950 is definitely faster. about 5-12% faster at pixel rate, texture rate, floating point performance, and games overall.
what the op is basically asking is gtx760 vs r9-280. the short answer is the 280/7950 is definitely faster. about 5-12% faster at pixel rate, texture rate, floating point performance, and games overall.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
slimething
April 30, 2014 8:16:18 PM
Cards dont gain performance from then to now.
The 760 performs the same then as it would now, same for the 7950. Old benchmarks reflect older cards.
NEW benchmarks, including new cards, still has 8% higher performance
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/R9_280X_OC/...
The 760 performs the same then as it would now, same for the 7950. Old benchmarks reflect older cards.
NEW benchmarks, including new cards, still has 8% higher performance
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/R9_280X_OC/...
-
Reply to Gam3r01
m
0
l
slimething said:
Why do people constantly post old "benchmarks" as if they have any relationship to today? not sure breh, its common knowledge argued over and over again that the 670 1344 core is somewhat comparable to the 7950, so how a 1152 core 760 is magically faster than a 7950 is just nonsense. also this is measured core clock to core clock so retarted reference core clocks dont matter.....
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
Gam3r01 said:
Cards dont gain performance from then to now.The 760 performs the same then as it would now, same for the 7950. Old benchmarks reflect older cards.
NEW benchmarks, including new cards, still has 8% higher performance
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/R9_280X_OC/...
its a 7950=280, not a 7970=280x
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
Gam3r01 said:
Cards dont gain performance from then to now.The 760 performs the same then as it would now, same for the 7950. Old benchmarks reflect older cards.
NEW benchmarks, including new cards, still has 8% higher performance
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/R9_280X_OC/...
its a 7950=280, not a 7970=280x
but that benchmark now shows a 760@915 and a 7950@800 and the difference dropped to 4%, instead of a 760@980 and a 7950@800 which was an 8% difference.
800x1.05=840..... 800x1.08=864..... 1100x1.08=1188
we all know for a fact that tahiti overclocks much better than gk104, tahiti held world records across all measures until titan. also dependent on the pcb design, some cards will overclock better. clock for clock, tahiti 7950/280 1792core is roughly 8% faster average than a 760 1152 core.
this is in arguable. and i own an nvidia card too so its not fanboy stuff, its math, statistics, and user input. doller=dollar, the 7950 has mantle too which will give it about a 4-7% increase in these mantle enhanced games.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
http://lanoc.org/review/video-cards/6834-sapphire-dual-...
over and over again, its just like anyone would expect.... they explicitly are running a 940mhz 1792 core tahiti against 920-1000mhz speed 760s.
techpowerup, being the as objective as they can be while quietly being nvidia biased(in their performance summery page), suspiciously has never review an r9-280.
over and over again, its just like anyone would expect.... they explicitly are running a 940mhz 1792 core tahiti against 920-1000mhz speed 760s.
techpowerup, being the as objective as they can be while quietly being nvidia biased(in their performance summery page), suspiciously has never review an r9-280.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
well my twin frozr 7950 ran 1200core 1575mem 24/7 fine and stayed under 75c, would go to 1250core with 1.3v but would go over 82c and i never wanted to suicide run it too far on stock air. but i could consistently get slighly higher scores (2500k@4.5ghz) in 3dmark, unigen heaven/valley, catzilla, on air, then most 670 users. gaming was a different story we all know that... some games just prefer nvidia or amd. but how an 1152 shader core 760 would all of a sudden beat an 1344 shader core 670 is not just ridiculous, is physically impossible. we can find benchmark after benchmark of the 670 and 7950 trading blows as drivers mature and games are optimized, im not going to waste my time looking those facts up.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
jsmessick
April 30, 2014 9:01:30 PM
jsmessick
April 30, 2014 9:03:49 PM
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/ite...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
These are the two cards i'm looking at, which is better regardless of price? Assuming I play standard games specifically like skyrim, darksouls, LoL, etc. And enjoy editting/photoshopping some.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
These are the two cards i'm looking at, which is better regardless of price? Assuming I play standard games specifically like skyrim, darksouls, LoL, etc. And enjoy editting/photoshopping some.
-
Reply to jsmessick
m
0
l
well a free game that you ACTUALLY want to play is a sweet deal, get the 760, its a great card for the money and more than 1080p capable. even so the minus 2-3 fps you might see with clock to clock comparisons, and im going to assume its a used 7950, is just not worth it if they are costing you the same price. your never going to be able to tell the difference between a 760@1.0ghz vs 7950@950mhz vs 670@ 940mhz.
but the 7950 is definitively slightly faster than the 760 in any measure besides physx or cuda.
sapphire doesn't do nvidia.
for nvidia cards in order of the best, evga, msi, gigabyte, asus... dont touch any other brands unless they are dramatically cheaper. but all four of those brands and top notch and worth the money.
but the 7950 is definitively slightly faster than the 760 in any measure besides physx or cuda.
sapphire doesn't do nvidia.
for nvidia cards in order of the best, evga, msi, gigabyte, asus... dont touch any other brands unless they are dramatically cheaper. but all four of those brands and top notch and worth the money.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
nikoli707 said:
but the 7950 is definitively slightly faster than the 760 in any measure besides physx or cuda.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_760_Mini_ITX...

-
Reply to 17seconds
m
0
l
nikoli707 said:
this is in arguable. and i own an nvidia card too so its not fanboy stuff, its math, statistics, and user input. doller=dollar, the 7950 has mantle too which will give it about a 4-7% increase in these mantle enhanced games.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_290X_Lightnin...

-
Reply to 17seconds
m
0
l
jsmessick
May 1, 2014 12:13:58 PM
nikoli707 said:
well a free game that you ACTUALLY want to play is a sweet deal, get the 760, its a great card for the money and more than 1080p capable. even so the minus 2-3 fps you might see with clock to clock comparisons, and im going to assume its a used 7950, is just not worth it if they are costing you the same price. your never going to be able to tell the difference between a 760@1.0ghz vs 7950@950mhz vs 670@ 940mhz.but the 7950 is definitively slightly faster than the 760 in any measure besides physx or cuda.
sapphire doesn't do nvidia.
for nvidia cards in order of the best, evga, msi, gigabyte, asus... dont touch any other brands unless they are dramatically cheaper. but all four of those brands and top notch and worth the money.
Alright I think i'll go with the 760, but which 760 is best to go with, they all seem to be around the same price, there are a ton of EVGA, Gigabyte, or Asus board I could go with, which would be the best one and why?
-
Reply to jsmessick
m
0
l
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
right now for the money comparing evga, msi, gigabyte or asus…. this msi twin frozr is $10 less than the rest after the rebate and is a great performing card.
right now for the money comparing evga, msi, gigabyte or asus…. this msi twin frozr is $10 less than the rest after the rebate and is a great performing card.
-
Reply to nikoli707
m
0
l
jsmessick
May 1, 2014 2:51:27 PM
Tradesman1 said:
I'd go the Asus or a EVGA, I particularly like the cooling on the Asus CU model, OCs very well.The Asus model doesn't have the greatest reviews on Newegg? is this something I should be worried about? theyre all about $259.99 so I could probably get either one.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... ASUS for reference
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... EVGA for reference
-
Reply to jsmessick
m
0
l
Related resources
- SolvedHD 7950 3GB vs GTX 760 2GB Forum
- SolvedEVGA GTX 760 (4GB GDDR5) vs RADEON HD7950 (3GB GDDR5) OC Forum
- SolvedAsus Nvidia GeForce GTX660 Ti 2GB DDR5 DirectCuII TOP VS XFX ATI Radeon HD7950 3GB DDR5 Double Dissipation Forum
- SolvedSapphire HD Radeon 7950 3GB vs. GTX 670 2GB Forum
- Solved2gb gtx 760 or a 3gb radeon 7950? Forum
- Solvedleadtek wf gtx 760 2gb or powercolor hd 7950 3gb pcs+ or powercolor r9 270x 2gb oc Forum
- Solved2gb Gtx 760 superclocked vs 7950 3gb Forum
- SolvedMSI Radeon R9 280X 3gb vs. ASUS GeForce GTX760 2gb? Forum
- EVGA GTX 760 SC 2GB or Gigabyte HD 7950 WINDFORCE 3X OC 3GB Forum
- MSI GTX 760 TF Gaming 2GB OC or Sapphire HD7950 3GB OC with Boost? Forum
- SolvedBuild help: FX 6300 + HD 7950 3gb vs I5 3570k + GTX 660 2gb Forum
- Radeon R9 270X 2GB vs Radeon HD 7950 3GB? Forum
- GIGABYTE GTX 650 Ti 2GB 2-way SLI or SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 7950 3GB for budget build Forum
- Solved2x GTX 760 4GB SLI vs. Radeon HD 7970 3GB Forum
- Nvidia GTX 680 2GB vs hd 7950 3GB x2 Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!